Rating: 
Summary: Back In Print, Finally.
Review: After my paperback copy of SEM decayed from several readings, I was more than a little disappointed to see that it had gone out of print. I'm glad that its finally back.Absolutely, Bateson is a "sloppy thinker," just as Picasso was a "sloppy painter" by the standards of Vermeer and Rembrandt. And really a comparison to artists - not formal theorists - is the metric by which Bateson should be judged. Why is it that Bateson attracts such loyalty? Because his writing illustrates a *process* of thinking, rather than a specific indisputable conclusion. Those who expend the time and effort to read Bateson - and in particular SEM - are rewarded with the certainty that the thinking process is as interesting as any possible conclusion. And it is somewhat more than "clever" that in the SEM dialogues, Bateson uses the very structure and form of his writings to illustrate the content he's explaining. Indeed it is precisely that uncertainty which vexes "formal" theorists (such as the reviewer below). Bateson - as a systems thinker - was always more interested in process and context than in defining any literal end result. After all, what possible "proof" could be offered that dolphins are second-order thinkers because they can learn about learning?. How on earth could proof be gained that icons and verbalizations are mediated by dreaming? I would offer this question to Bateson's critics: if his thinking is so irredeemably sloppy, what then is his lasting appeal? Why does he - among all the philosophers and scientists of the 20th century - continue to have such a loyal following? Name a single cybernetician or epistomologist who is commonly cited in contemporary philosphical thinking. Answer: there are none. So the bigger question is not why Bateson is popular, but why systems thinking (of which Bateson was a practitioner) is so absent from American academia. That fact is an indictment of something, but is certainly is not Gregory Bateson.
Rating:
Summary: A true masterpiece!
Review: Bateson's writings are profoundly layered with meaning that a brief glance will overlook. His prolific influence can be found in sundry fields of study, including psychiatry, communication theory, and marriage and family therapy to name a few. This is the type of book (among few) that can be read over and over again while discovering new facets of understanding every time. I highly recommend the metalogues.
Rating:
Summary: A true masterpiece!
Review: Bateson's writings are profoundly layered with meaning that a brief glance will overlook. His prolific influence can be found in sundry fields of study, including psychiatry, communication theory, and marriage and family therapy to name a few. This is the type of book (among few) that can be read over and over again while discovering new facets of understanding every time. I highly recommend the metalogues.
Rating: 
Summary: Insightful, but sloppy
Review: Gregory Bateson had a number of insights that appear to be, in retrospect, quite precient. He was talking about notions like the "mind of nature" even before James Lovelock codified his Gaia Hypothesis. It's very tempting to look back at Bateson's writing and see him as a very forward thinker. The problem is that he was a very sloppy thinker. One reviewer spoke of him in the context of the postmoderns, and that's a very apt comparison. Like the postmoderns, Bateson's essays and arguments didn't come so much from obervation and evidence as they did from a certain cleverness, an ability to draw a complex and compelling picture without much reference to the known world. He throws out a lot of string statements about the world, but he never quite quite gives you any justification. Consider this quote: "The individual mind is immanent but not only in the body. It is immanent also in pathways and messages outside the body; and there is a larger mind of which the individual mind is only a sub-system. This larger mind is comparable to God and in the total interconnected social systems and planetary ecology." That's an interesting notion, but hardly a new one. It's the core thesis of Hobbes' "Leviathon", dressed it up in contemporary language with contemporary allusion. A number of current theorists and philosophers hold similar notions, but as part of a larger and hopefully self-consistant framework that Bateson lacks. "An interesting intermediate between the iconic coding of animals and the verbal coding of human speech can be recognized in human dreaming and human myth." (p. 421) Cleverly put, and possibly true, but he has no evidence for making this statement. It's completely hypothetical, and very much ad-hoc. Bateson's followers tend to have an almost religious fervor- and yet you'll find few if any citations of his work in the serious works of others. There just wasn't much there other than glib notions without any sort of attempt at building an integrated thoery from which these notions might arise. Bateson is still worth reading, both for historical reasons and for his clever ways of expressing some of these ideas. But he's not quite the genius his fans would have us believe.
Rating:
Summary: a masterpiece
Review: Gregory Bateson made substantial contributions to many fields of science. This classic book gives clearly the idea of this outstanding work and of the evolution of his thought.
Rating:
Summary: Back in print at last!
Review: It is unbelievable that this masterpiece has been out of print for so long. I have been looking fruitlessly for a copy for some years, having eventually had to return a loan copy. I am delighted that it is available again. Organised as a collection of relatively short essays, this has a legitimate claim to be the outstanding book of the 20th century for anyone interested in mind, change, evolution, systems thinking, ecology, epistemology, organisations, therapy and more. Be warned - it can be very dense in places, but the effort is worth it. On the right day it's really stimulating - on a bad day, I'd read something easier! 'Form, Substance and Difference', 'Conscious Purpose versus Nature' and 'The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication' are absolutely central texts for anyone considering how we need to respond to the current world crisis. Other key papers include 'The cybernetics of "Self": A theory of alchoholism' and 'Social Planning and the Concept of Deutero Learning'. If you work in the field of Organisational Development you will probably be familiar with some of the content through the many writers who have built on Bateson's work. Fritjof Capra writes about him a great deal. The original is best though. The fact that it is back in print is tremendous. How can something this good have been out of print for so long? David Ballard
Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: It's unfortunate that Bateson died before postmodern thought really made it over the Atlantic since it appears he was quite concerned about many of the old views held by North American philosophers. The chapters concerning contextualization and language use echo what Foucalt, Lyotard and Derrida have been trying to get across except Bateson really managed to put these ideas into somewhat more accessible form. Bateson was around for the beginnings of information theory and cybernetics and again, he was probably very disappointed in their state when he died. However, if one now looks at what people like Perlovsky and Chaitin have worked on one may begin to see that science is finding more and more problems with maintaining even the idea of objectivity. In particular, if one looks at the work of Wilson ("Spikes, Decisions, and Actions") and Prigogine then the theory of objectivity within the physical world comes falling down. The only book close to giving a complete overview like Bateson managed is Jantsch's "Self-Organizing Universe", now out of print. This is well worth reading and pondering. One can only hope more people begin to realize that we have a great opportunity for advancing ourselves (instead of rushing towards anhilation)if we can just change some of present system of thought.
Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: It's unfortunate that Bateson died before postmodern thought really made it over the Atlantic since it appears he was quite concerned about many of the old views held by North American philosophers. The chapters concerning contextualization and language use echo what Foucalt, Lyotard and Derrida have been trying to get across except Bateson really managed to put these ideas into somewhat more accessible form. Bateson was around for the beginnings of information theory and cybernetics and again, he was probably very disappointed in their state when he died. However, if one now looks at what people like Perlovsky and Chaitin have worked on one may begin to see that science is finding more and more problems with maintaining even the idea of objectivity. In particular, if one looks at the work of Wilson ("Spikes, Decisions, and Actions") and Prigogine then the theory of objectivity within the physical world comes falling down. The only book close to giving a complete overview like Bateson managed is Jantsch's "Self-Organizing Universe", now out of print. This is well worth reading and pondering. One can only hope more people begin to realize that we have a great opportunity for advancing ourselves (instead of rushing towards anhilation)if we can just change some of present system of thought.
Rating:
Summary: Oh No
Review: no, no- Bateson wasn't a sloppy thinker at all. Yet, he wasn't fond of interiors or dead thoughts. His limitations (and i don't pretend to consider that my greatest capacities begin anywhere near his greatest limits)rest in his eternal (as it should be, i think) struggle with epistemology. Throught his later years he seemed to have a guiding intuition that there was not yet an adequit epistemology to address our modern crises. He would probably be the first to admit he only took small steps in helping this situation. His steps, however small, misguided and/or sloopy, were nevertheless extremely creative and point in a significant direction. If he had read Rudolf Steiner's "Truth and Knowledge" he would have laughed quite a bit, died later, and then re-read it in a much graver (pun intended) tone. Or not, but...
Rating: 
Summary: This book is an old friend.
Review: Out of the hundreds of books that I was forced to read through high school and college, maybe five caught my imagination. This was one of them. Before anyone was really interested in thinking about thinking, Bateson sat down and did so. He was attempting to raise a bunch of questions that might help some to in-form their search for understanding in the world, or at least for points to be curious about, which in his mind is where science has to begin if it wants to know anything. It certainly helped to inform my thinking. Not only did Bateson do a bang-up job of getting me to think in interesting or useful or maybe somewhat cleaner ways, he's actually pretty good at writing. ....
| 
